Individual Differences in Visual Navigation

  • Chaomei Chen

Abstract

Users bring to the computer a wide variety of categories and factors individual to them, such as relevant experience, domain knowledge, and a number of cognitive abilities and styles. Empirical evidence and theoretical studies in the literature suggest that there may be some profound connections between visual user interfaces and a number of cognitive factors that have been extensively studied in related disciplines.

Keywords

Editing Metaphor Dick Harman Furnas 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Anderson, J (1980). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. Freeman (San Francisco).Google Scholar
  2. Benyon, DR (1993). Accommodating individual differences through an adaptive user interface. In: M Schneider-Hufschmidt, T Kühme, and U Malinowski (eds.), Adaptive User Interfaces — Results and Prospects . Elsevier (Amsterdam).Google Scholar
  3. Benyon, DR, and Murray, DM (1993). Adaptive systems: From intelligent tutoring to autonomous agents. Knowledge-based Systems, 6(3).Google Scholar
  4. Benyon, D, and Höök, K (1997). Navigation in information spaces: Supporting the individual. Proceedings of Human-Computer Interaction: INTERACT 97, Chapman and Hall, pp. 39–46.Google Scholar
  5. Boyd, C, and Darken, R (1996). Psychological issues of virtual environment interfaces. Proceedings of CHI 96, ACM Press, pp. 426.Google Scholar
  6. Campagnoni, F, and Ehrlich, K (1989). Information retrieval using a hypertext-based help system. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 7:271–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carroll, JB (1974). Psychometric tests as cognitive tasks: A new structure of intellect. Educational Testing Service (Princeton, USA), pp. 74–6.Google Scholar
  8. Carroll, JB (1993). Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor Analytical Studies. CUP (Cambridge, UK).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen, C. (1998a). Bridging the gap: The use of Pathfinder networks in visual navigation. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 9(3):267–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen, C. (1998b). Generalised Similarity Analysis and Pathfinder Network Scaling. Interacting with Computers, 10(2):107–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen, C, and Rada, R (1996). Interacting with hypertext: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Human-Computer Interaction, 11(2):125–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, C, and Czerwinski, M (1997). Spatial ability and visual navigation: An empirical study. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 3:67–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen, C, and Czerwinski, M (1998). From latent semantics to spatial hypertext: An integrated approach. Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (Hypertext 98) (Pittsburgh, PA., June 1998), ACM Press, pp. 77–86.Google Scholar
  14. Chen, C, Czerwinski, M, and Macredie, R (forthcoming). Individual differences in virtual environments: An Introduction. Journal of the American Society for Information Science(Special Issue).Google Scholar
  15. Chimera, R, and Shneiderman, B (1994). An exploratory evaluation of three interfaces for browsing large hierarchical tables of contents. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(4):383–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Craik, FIM, and Lockhart, RS (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11:671–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dahlbäck, N, Höök, K, and Sjölinder, M (1996). Spatial cognition in the mind and in the world: The case of hypermedia navigation. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (University of California, San Diego, July 1996).Google Scholar
  18. Darken, RP, and Sibert, JL (1996). Wayfinding strategies and behaviors in large virtual worlds. Proceedings of CHI 96.Google Scholar
  19. Deerwester, S, Dumais, ST, Landauer, TK, Furnas, GW, and Harshman, RA (1990). Indexing by Latent Semantic Analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6):391–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dillon, A, and Watson, C (1996). User analysis in HCI: The historical lessons from individual differences research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(6):619–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dillon, A, McKnight, C, and Richardson, J (1990). Navigating in hypertext: A critical review of the concept. In: EAD Diaper (ed.), Human-Computer Interaction — INTERACT90, Elsevier (Amsterdam), pp. 587–92.Google Scholar
  22. Dourish, P, and Chalmers, M (1994). Running out of space: Models of information navigation. Proceedings of HCI 94.Google Scholar
  23. Eckstrom, RB, French, JW, Harman, HH, and Derman, D (1976). Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests.Educational Testing Service (Princeton, USA).Google Scholar
  24. Edwards, D, and Hardman, L (1989). Lost in hyperspace: Cognitive mapping and navigation in a hypertext environment. In: R McAleese (ed.), Hypertext: Theory into practice. Intellect Books (Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
  25. Egan, D (1988). Individual differences in Human-Computer Interaction. In: M Helander (ed.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier (Amsterdam), pp. 543–68.Google Scholar
  26. Eisenberg, M, Nishioka, A, and Schreiner, ME (1997). Helping users think in three dimensions: steps toward incorporating spatial cognition in user modelling. Proceedings of the 1997 International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI 97), pp. 113–120.Google Scholar
  27. Furnas, GW (1986). Generalized fisheye views. Proceedings of CHI 86. ACM Press, pp. 16–23.Google Scholar
  28. Hearst, M, and Karadi, C (1997). Cat-a-Cone: An interactive interface for specifying searches and viewing retrieval results using a large category hierarchy. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual International ACM/SIGIR Conference (Philadelphia, PA, July 1997), ACM Press.Google Scholar
  29. Herndon, KP, Dam, A v, and Gleicher, M (1994). The challenges of 3D interaction: A CHI 94 Workshop. SIGCHI Bulletin, 26(4):36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Höök, K, Dahlbäck, N, and Sjölinder, M (1996). Individual differences and navigation in hypermedia. Proceedings of ECCE-8 (http://www.cs.vu.nl/~eace/).Google Scholar
  31. Kline, P (1994). Review of Carroll’s human cognitive abilities. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14:387–99.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. Lokuge, I, Gilbert, SA, and Richards, W (1996). Structuring information with mental models: A tour of Boston. Proceedings of CHI 96, ACM Press.Google Scholar
  33. Pirolli, P, and Card, SK (1995). Information foraging in information access environments. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing (CHI 95) (Denver, CO), ACM Press, pp. 51–8.Google Scholar
  34. Schvaneveldt, RW, Durso, FT, and Dearholt, DW (1989). Network structures in proximity data. In: G Bower (ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 24. Academic Press, pp. 249–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Streeter, LDV, and Wonsiewicz, S (1985). How to tell people where to go: Comparing navigational aids. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 22:549–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sutcliffe, A, and Patel, U (1996). 3D or not 3D: Is it nobler in the mind? In: MA Sasse, RJ Cunningham, and RL Winder (eds.), People and Computers XI. Springer-Verlag (London, UK), pp. 79–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tolman, EC (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55:189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Veerasamy, A, and Belkin, NJ (1996). Evaluation of a tool for visualization of information retrieval results. Proceedings of SIGIR 96 (Zurich, Switzerland). ACM Press, pp. 85–92.Google Scholar
  39. Vicente, KJ, and Williges, RC (1988). Accommodating individual differences in searching a hierarchical file system. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 29:647–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaomei Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information Systems and ComputingBrunel UniversityUxbridgeUK

Personalised recommendations